Replies below, by paragraph.

Joe Fjelstad wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Brian,
>
> Don't shoot the messenger... ;-)

I wan't getting at you, only the sensationalist doomsayer journalism!
>
> I post things that I think might be of interest to the group and
> purposefully to get the opinions rolling.

And why not?
>
> I always appreciate Chuck's keen wit and his spirited and  rousing responses
> to these matters.
>
> I am a bit simpler in my views.
>
> I am not a climatologist and I cannot answer Chuck's well  phrased questions
> regarding the average temperature measurement technique,  however, global
> warming is either under way or it is not.

I'm not a climatologist, either. However, I have made some studies of
the subject and claim that I understand the basic concepts of
atmospheric sciences. I do not subscribe to "global warming" but more to
"climate change" and I'm 99.9% convinced, based on published
observations, that both a) the global climate is changing and b) that
man is contributing heavily to the change.
>
> If warming is in fact happening and we  collectively can make adjustments
> (this assumes a "positive" response)  and use less energy to solve what truly is
> real problem before it can  be proven to the satisfaction of all skeptics,
> Everybody wins (or at least  certainly those with homes near sea level.. ;-).

In principle, I agree. However, there is no need to use less energy
(although that would not be a bad thing, per se) so much as to use
energy wisely. We can use sufficient energy to maintain our current
life-style. What we must reduce, and reduce drastically, is our use of
fossil fuels of all types. I believe that much of the opposition comes
from an unnecessary fear of not being able to heat our houses in winter,
cool them in summer or transport ourselves from A to B. What these
sceptics may not realise is that by doing nothing, they are more likely
to precipitate the situation they fear most!
>
> If on the other hand, we make adjustments and use less  energy and there is
> not a real problem or it is just going to happen anyway  as part of a large
> natural cycle, we still all win as no harm is done by  our actions and we have
> saved some bucks and extended the fuel supply for use by  future generations.

Not only that, we shall have reduced the number of the annual 3,000,000
deaths in the world due to energy use (abuse?) by a large number and we
shall have made enormous savings in health-care costs, which will more
than pay for extra infrastructure that may otherwise appear
uneconomical. This alone is ample justification to minimise fossil fuel
use, even if climate change were a myth.
>
> As most folks studying the matter acknowledge, that the matter of  weather is
> hugely complex, Chuck's pointed questions attest to  that, but the stakes, it
> seems, are still high.

I agree that the situation is hugely complex, but there are other
factors in the equation. Today, we almost breathe a sigh of relief when
crude oil drops to $60/bbl, yet there would have been street riots just
2 or 3 years ago if anyone said that oil would reach that figure in less
than a decade. This shows that the economy is quite resilient to oil
prices and I forecast that we have not seen the end to price hikes: who
knows? Maybe $100/bbl by next winter if things go sour. However, we must
not forget that we are possibly reaching global peak oil and supplies
will get progressively tighter. The US reached its production peak
decades ago and the UK in the last few years (thanks to the wasteful,
auto-glorifying, Thatcher economy). It therefore makes simple sense to
wean ourselves off oil and natural gas as rapidly as we can. Coal is,
for the moment, plentiful, but it is the most polluting (non-carbon)
fuel available and we simply cannot convert to using more coal without
stifling the planet with waste; rather we should cut down on it.
>
> I am not certain that there is a negative response, unless it is  that we
> just let go of the wheel and drive blind.
>
> The reality, for all I know, may well be that we in this  forum will all be
> long gone if and when the impact predicted by it seems a  good number of
> scientists, fully registers. Maybe before that time the earth  will be hit by a
> rogue asteroid or comet and it will strike the  control - alt - delete keys and
> reset the earth's operating system for us,  making the whole matter moot... ;-)

I'll probably be the first to shuffle off this mortal coil as my white
beard is likely to trip me up soon. However, I'll come back to haunt the
naysayers just to have the satisfactions of saying, "I told you so!" :-)

Best regards,

Brian.
<snip>